Abstract
Background
Stomach cancer is the second most commonly diagnosed cancer in Korea. Although the long-term survival outcome has improved, secondary primary tumors from periampullary regions are increasing inevitably and pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) following gastrectomy is challenging. This study evaluates the surgical outcomes of PD following gastrectomy and suggests the optimum method for reconstruction.
Methods
Patients who underwent curative PD with a history of gastric resection between 2005 and 2015 were assessed retrospectively. PD was performed according to the standard fashion, with the aim of creating a new pancreaticobiliary limb with sufficient length (40–50 cm). Different reconstructive methods were employed during PD according to the previous gastrectomy type.
Results
A total of 3064 patients underwent PD, 39 of whom had previous gastrectomies including 12 with Billroth I gastrectomy, 20 with Billroth II gastrectomy, and seven patients with total gastrectomy (TG). In patients with Billroth I gastrectomy, all of the previous gastroduodenostomy site was resected for specimen retrieval. All previous esophagojejunostomy site was preserved in seven patients who had TG. In the Billroth II patients, the gastrojejunostomy site was preserved in 17 patients. Re-operation after PD was required in two patients, and 14 patients (36 %) developed pancreatic fistula and five (13 %) of grade B or higher.
Conclusions
Our study has been the largest report so far of PD following gastric resection, and we were able to confirm the safety and the feasibility of PD procedure. We therefore suggest standardizing the reconstruction method for PD following gastrectomy based on the type of previous gastrectomy.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM et al (2011) Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 61:69–90
Jung KW, Won YJ, Kong HJ et al (2015) Cancer statistics in Korea: incidence, mortality, survival, and prevalence in 2012. Cancer Res Treat 47:127–141
Choi Y, Gwack J, Kim Y et al (2006) Long term trends and the future gastric cancer mortality in Korea: 1983–2013. Cancer Res Treat 38:7–12
Kim C, Chon H, Kang B et al (2013) Prediction of metachronous multiple primary cancers following the curative resection of gastric cancer. BMC Cancer 13:394
Kim JY, Jang WY, Heo MH et al (2012) Metachronous double primary cancer after diagnosis of gastric cancer. Cancer Res Treat 44:173–178
Ikeda Y, Saku M, Kawanaka H et al (2003) Features of second primary cancer in patients with gastric cancer. Oncology 65:113–117
Fortner JG (1984) Regional pancreatectomy for cancer of the pancreas, ampulla, and other related sites. Tumor staging and results. Ann Surg 199:418–425
Yun S, Choi D (2014) Pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with a history of total gastrectomy for stomach cancers. Int Surg 99:71–76
Kim SH, Hwang HK, Kang CM et al (2012) Pancreatoduodenectomy in patients with periampullary cancer after radical subtotal gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Am Surg 78:E164–E167
Yokoyama S, Sekioka A, Ueno K et al (2014) Pancreaticoduodenectomy following total gastrectomy: a case report and literature review. World J Gastroenterol WJG 20:2721–2724
Bechi P, Dioscoridi L (2015) Reconstructive strategy after pancreaticoduodenectomy in partially gastrectomized patients. JOP J Pancreas 16:198–200
Whipple AO, Parsons WB, Mullins CR (1935) Treatment of carcinoma of the ampulla of vater. Ann Surg 102:763–779
Kwon YJ, Ahn BK, Park HK et al (2013) One layer end-to-side pancreaticojejunostomy using reinforcing suture on the pancreatic stump. Hepatogastroenterology 60:1488–1491
Kim Z, Kim J, Min JK et al (2010) Negative pressure external drainage of the pancreatic duct in pancreaticoduodenectomy. Hepatogastroenterology 57:625–630
Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240:205–213
Bassi C, Dervenis C, Butturini G et al (2005) Postoperative pancreatic fistula: an international study group (ISGPF) definition. Surgery 138:8–13
Wente MN, Veit JA, Bassi C et al (2007) Postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH): an International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) definition. Surgery 142:20–25
Wente MN, Bassi C, Dervenis C et al (2007) Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) after pancreatic surgery: a suggested definition by the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS). Surgery 142:761–768
Hemminki K, Li X (2003) Familial and second primary pancreatic cancers: a nationwide epidemiologic study from Sweden. Int J Cancer 103:525–530
Song KB, Kim SC, Hwang DW et al (2015) Matched case-control analysis comparing laparoscopic and open pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with periampullary tumors. Ann Surg 262:146–155
Kwak BJ, Kim SC, Song KB et al (2014) Prognostic factors associated with early mortality after surgical resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Korean J Hepato-biliary Pancreat Surg 18:138–146
Park JS, Hwang HK, Kim JK et al (2009) Clinical validation and risk factors for delayed gastric emptying based on the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) Classification. Surgery 146:882–887
Ikeda Y, Saku M, Kishihara F et al (2005) Effective follow-up for recurrence or a second primary cancer in patients with early gastric cancer. Br J Surg 92:235–239
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
Dooin Lee, Jae Hoon Lee, Dongho Choi, Chang Moo Kang, Jae Uk Chong, Song-Chul Kim, and Kyeong Geun Lee declare that they have no conflict of interest or financial ties to disclose.
Additional information
Dooin Lee and Jae Hoon Lee have contributed equally to this work.
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lee, D., Lee, J.H., Choi, D. et al. Surgical Strategy and Outcome in Patients Undergoing Pancreaticoduodenectomy After Gastric Resection: A Three-Center Experience with 39 Patients. World J Surg 41, 552–558 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-016-3729-1
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-016-3729-1